----- Original Message ----- From: "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tomcat Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:33 AM Subject: Re: Watchdog problems on 3.3.x
> > The current Coyote connector (almost, but more on that later) passes > > Watchdog on port 80. It fails badly on port 8080. From the discussions > on > > list between Remy and Costin, this is because the Watchdog tests > incorrectly > > fail to include the port in the Host header for the HTTP/1.1 protocol. > > I thought Watchdog used HTTP/1.0 (at least Watchdog 4 does). Yes, it does use HTTP/1.0. It also (at least for the 3.x one) sends a Host header. It seems that the problem is that we are enforcing the HTTP/1.1 RFC based only on the presence of a Host header. We should probably fall back to using the socket port for HTTP/1.0 clients who send a Host header without a port. > > If it uses HTTP/1.0, then it's a problem with Coyote. > If it uses HTTP/1.1, then it's a problem with the old Watchdog. > > > Given that Watchdog *is* the test that Tomcat has to pass to be the > > reference implementation, I'd like some word that we can change the 2.2 > > Watchdog to be HTTP/1.1 compliant. > > > > The failed test on port 80 (same as the old CoyoteIntercepter) has to do > > with un-safe escapes in the URL, which by default, DecodeInterceptor > faults. > > Remy > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
